Anti-God

How many kids does she have, and why is she worried about caterpillars and not humans?

The Democratic Virginia delegate who has recently come under fire for sponsoring a bill in the Virginia House of Delegates that would allow the termination of a pregnancy up to 40 weeks old, is also the chief patron of a bill that would protect the lives of “fall cankerworms” during certain months.

A BILL to amend and reenact § 15.2-2403 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 1 of Chapter 9 of Title 15.2 a section numbered 15.2-926.4, relating to cankerworms; eradication; prohibition on spraying during certain months.

Tran apparently deleted all of her social media following backlash to her abortion bill.

Virginia GOP (RPV)

✔@VA_GOP

What do an unborn baby in the third trimester and Delegate Kathy Tran’s Twitter account have in common?

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,” Northam said.

The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will allow President Donald Trump to temporarily enforce restrictions on transgender individuals serving in the military.

As is typical of orders of this nature, the Court gave no reason for its decision, though Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan noted their dissent.

The Trump administration first petitioned the Supreme Court to decide directly on the legality of the trans-soldiers ban, after federal trial judges in California, Washington, D.C., and Washington state issued orders prohibiting its enforcement. The plaintiffs in those lawsuits argue the policy violates a range of constitutional rights including the First Amendment, equal protection, and due process.

The government said the Court’s intervention was necessary because the lower court decision “require the military to maintain a policy that, in its own professional judgment, risks undermining readiness, disrupting unit cohesion, and weakening military effectiveness and lethality.”

Subsequent to that request, the Department of Justice filed a second petition proposing an alternative: in the event the Court denied the first request, the justices could allow enforcement of the ban while litigation continues in the lower courts. The Court granted that request Tuesday.

Tuesday’s decision is a strong indicator that the government would prevail if the high court has to issue a final ruling in the dispute.

Another district court order from Maryland that was not before the Court prohibits the government from enforcing its restrictions on trans military personnel. Though that order remains in effect for the moment, it will likely terminate in the near future.

The president abruptly announced on Twitter that the military would not permit trans personnel to serve in the military. Thereafter, former Defense Secretary James Mattis convened a panel of military experts to conduct an independent review of the subject. Their findings served as the basis of Mattis’ February 2018 memo which implemented Trump’s request.

That memo provides that individuals with a history of gender dysphoria — a clinical term referring to anxiety triggered by the conflict between one’s biological sex and the gender with which they identify — may enlist provided they are willing to serve in their biological sex and have not suffered gender dysphoria for a continuous three-year period prior to recruitment. Active personnel who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria may continue to serve provided they do so in their biological sex.

Estimates vary as to the number of transgender individuals in the military: some studies place the figure between 1,000 and 6,000, while others suggest there are as many as 8,000.

“To our transgender siblings-in-arms, veterans, and hopeful recruits: This battle is not yet over. You will not be left behind or forgotten,” OutServe said in a tweet following Tuesday morning’s decision.

The Gay Mafia is upset because Rep. Gabbard believes in traditional marriage. Why can’t she believe this and the homosexuals just be tolerant? They want to force us to believe their vile life style. Join Our Video Platform Now: commonsensenation.net/videos/

Democratic presidential contender Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is under fire for her past activism and statements in favor of traditional marriage and against “homosexual activists.”

Gabbard, described by CNN as “the first Hindu and American Samoan” elected to Congress, made a surprise announcement Friday that she would be running for president in 2020.

She is a left-wing Democrat and Iraq War veteran with a history of iconoclastic stances. In 2016, she resigned from a leadership position on the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to support Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), for president, and was one of the first to raise the alarm about then-chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s effort to tilt the Democratic Party presidential primary in favor of establishment favorite Hillary Clinton.

Just last week, Gabbard blasted Democrats in the Senate — including a fellow Hawaiian and fellow “progressives” — for questioning a judicial nominee’s Catholic faith, including his membership in the Knights of Columbus.

The report, “Tulsi Gabbard once touted working for anti-gay group that backed conversion therapy,” accuses her of “anti-gay” stances (original link):

Tulsi Gabbard herself is quoted in a 2000 press release from The Alliance for Traditional Marriage. In it, she attacks gay rights activists who were opposed to her mother Carol’s bid for the state’s board of education.

Tulsi Gabbard’s anti-gay efforts continued after she became a state representative.

Shortly after Gabbard announced her presidential ambitions Friday, her testimony at a hearing opposing a civil unions bill in 2004 resurfaced.

“To try to act as if there is a difference between ‘civil unions’ and same-sex marriage is dishonest, cowardly and extremely disrespectful to the people of Hawaii,” Gabbard said at the time. “As Democrats we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists.”

Gabbard has since changed her views and apologized for her past statements in 2012, according to the New Yorker.

Catholic priest, 73, who had 2,000 images and videos of child porn, discussed raping and murdering young boys in chat rooms, and once admitted to peeing in the wine for Mass is sentenced to 25 years in prison

He called himself ‘one sick puppy’ as he apologized to the courtroom Thursday

Possessed ‘violent, disturbing, and torturous’ images that involved children

Faucher told someone online he wanted to sexually abuse boys, was attracted to six-year-old boys, and that the thought of killing someone excited him

Faucher also revealed in chats he wanted to sexually abuse altar boys and babies

Police also found photographs of him peeing on a cross and a canon law book

A Catholic priest who had more than 2,000 photos and videos of child pornography on his computer and phone has been sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Thomas Faucher, a well-known priest in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise, will not be eligible for parole and must register as a sex offender.

Faucher, 73, pleaded guilty to five felony crimes after investigators discovered thousands of disturbing images and chats about raping and murdering young boys.

He pleaded guilty to two counts of distribution of sexually exploitative material, two counts of possession of sexually exploitative materials, and one count of drug possession.

Faucher called himself ‘one sick puppy’ as he apologized to the courtroom before his sentencing on Thursday, according to the Idaho Statesman.

‘I am deeply sorry that I was and have been connected to that in any way,’ he told 4th District Court Judge Jason Scott.

‘I was one really sick puppy. I screwed up big time. I feel so much remorse and anger.’

Faucher, a well-known priest in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise, will not be eligible for parole and must register as a sex offender

Faucher tried to convince the judge that he should not receive jail time so that he could help others and ‘give lectures on the evils of child pornography’, saying there were ‘many people’ who would ‘benefit’ if he wasn’t behind bars.

‘There are no people who will benefit if I am in jail or prison,’ he added.

But Scott was not convinced, calling the priest a ‘legitimate risk to the community’.

‘This is a crime that has potential for both immediate and long-lasting consequences,’ the judge added.

Detective John Brumbaugh of the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force took to the stand on Thursday to describe the extent of disturbing content he found on Faucher’s devices.

Brumbaugh said he first received a tip regarding two images that had been sent from the email address wtfauch@aol.com.

He then began investigating Faruch, discovering thousands of ‘violent, disturbing, and torturous’ images that involved ‘young-looking subjects’.

Faucher spoke extensively to a person called ‘Bruno’, telling them that he wanted to have sex with boys – including some in his own family – and was attracted to six-year-old boys.

The priest also told Bruno that he had ‘satanic desires’ and that the ‘thought of killing someone does begin to excite me’.

He admitted to fantasies about sexually abusing altar boys and babies and said he enjoyed watching a video of a boy being beaten to death.

Investigators found images of Faucher peeing on a cross and a canon law book. In one chat, Faucher claimed he urinated in the wine for Mass.

The priest had a Dropbox, shared with another user, titled ‘Innocence Defiled’. He admitted in chats that he felt ‘wonderful indifference’ as he solicited more child pornography.

Faucher was was initially charged with 21 counts of felony sexual exploitation of a child when he was arrested in February

‘It felt good to lie for no good reason except to do it,’ Faucher told Bruno in one chat.

‘Most of the time, I just make a new reality and believe it as long as it suits me.’

Details of the images and conversations were so graphic that many chose to leave the Ada County Courtroom on Thursday. Some were in tears.

Brumbaugh said the images even took a toll on himself and others who were working on the investigation.

‘The volume was something I haven’t come across,’ he told the courtroom.

Faucher was arrested in February. He told Brumbaugh that no one else had access to his email account.

He was initially charged with 21 counts of felony sexual exploitation of a child, as well as one count of felony possession of LSD and possession of marijuana and ecstasy.

Brumbaugh said there was no evidence in which Faucher expressed that he did not want to receive child pornography.

While pleading guilty, Faucher claimed that he couldn’t remember sharing child porn because he had alcohol-induced depression and dementia.

Following Faucher’s arrest, two men alleged that the priest had sexually abused them.

While the statute of limitations for most child sex crimes in Idaho was removed in 2006, the law was not retroactive – meaning abuse charges will likely never be filed.

Ada County Deputy Prosecutor Kassandra Slaven had asked for a 30-year prison sentence, noting that Faucher was diagnosed a pedophile and that an evaluation found there was a high risk he would reoffend.

‘It shakes the community. It shakes the members of the Catholic Church,’ she said. ‘He portrays himself as a victim and is not at all accountable for his actions.’

Defense attorney Mark Manweiler asked that Faucher receive probation and treatment, arguing that the evidence didn’t prove the priest looked at all the images on his computer and claiming Faucher ‘never sexually abused any child’.

Officials from the Diocese of Boise were in court for the sentencing, and spokesman Gene Fadness said they will seek to have Faucher defrocked.

‘It’s been agonizing every day for the parishioners at Saint Mary’s and for those in the community, even outside Saint Mary’s,’ he said.

‘[Faucher] was not just a priest, but a prominent priest, well known. This has been very difficult for everyone involved.’

‘Almost immediately after [Thursday], we will submit our case to Rome.’

The diocese also released a statement reiterating Fadness’ words.

‘The volumes of shocking information that the law enforcement investigation uncovered reveal the heinous nature of child pornography and the tragic impact upon its victims,’ the statement read.

‘While we cannot begin to fathom what brought Faucher to the point that he was able to enter into this evil and dark world, we are thankful for the efforts of the law enforcement community in doing what it can to protect our children from these crimes.’

Faucher was evicted from the home he rented from the diocese following his arrest. They had it exorcised before selling it.

For reasons that suddenly make sense, the bar enforces a strict ban on cell phone usage.

One Yelp reviewer wrote that the bar makes you “put your phone into a locked magnet pouch at the door, so it can’t be used while there. You can slip it into your pocket but can’t get in the pouch.”

Below Good Morning America Praising Him

Another explained it this way: “The club put our phones in these locked sleeves, which we could [carry] around the club.”

The first to report this about the sexual exploitation of this child was a YouTuber named Yosef Ozia, who connected all these dots based on the Yelp reviews:

As you can see in the video, this 11-year-old boy is dressed in drag and prancing around wearing a tank top as grown men cheer and throw money.

In even creepier news, “Desmond Is Amazing” has been celebrated by the establishment media.

The Daily Beast and NBC News have both gushed over what can only be described as the sexual exploitation of a child.

According to LifeSite, “ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ (GMA) recently devoted a segment to the boy during which his cross-dressing was celebrated as an example of individuality, and his parents were praised for their support of his drag hobby.”

The Daily Wire reports that this exploitation has been going on for years: “When Desmond was just six years old, he was featured in a music video with drag queen and Season Six winner of RuPaul’s Drag Race Jinkx Monsoon. As a fourth-grader, the child was used to advance the LGBT agenda, giving a speech at New York City’s Pride in 2017.”

According to Desmond’s biography, he came out as a homosexual — when he was born:

Desmond was born in June 2007, during NYC Pride Week, at St. Vincent’s Hospital in Manhattan. As he tells it, this means that he “is a member of the Village People by default”. He has also claimed that he “came out of the closet when he was born”. Desmond has a loving family and lives in New York City with his father, mother, and many pets. He also has an older sister. Desmond’s nickname at home is Desi.

In this same write up, though, Desmond’s parents claim they are just letting him do what he wants — that a therapist told them this is healthy. In other words, if he enjoys dressing like a girl, being an LGBT icon, and performing in drag, let him.

But it also says this [emphasis added]:

Although he wants everyone to express themselves as genuinely as possible, he is concerned about the growing trend of young teen and child drag performers to dress or act overly sexy or provocatively, much like their adult counterparts. He feels that it sends the wrong message about all young drag performers and results in added aggression, bullying, and hatred, not only from society, but from within the LGBTQ community itself. Although an often controversial topic, he would personally like to see more young people discovering a drag style that speaks to their personal truth, but is at the same time, more age appropriate.

So, in public, Desmond is presented as a child just doing what he loves but in a healthy way that is not “overly sexual” or “provocative,” in a manner that is “age appropriate.”

But at gay bars where your phone’s recording devices are disabled upon entry, 11-year-old Desmond’s parents have him dancing around on stage in a tank top while grown men hoot, holler, and throw money.

If you thought the Supreme Court would be Conservative, well think again.

The Supreme Court declined to review three cases relating to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood at the state level Monday, over a vigorous dissent from Justice Clarence Thomas.

The dissent was significant because it indicates that Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the high court’s liberal wing to deny review of a lower court decision that favored the nation’s largest abortion provider.

“So what explains the Court’s refusal to do its job here?,” Thomas wrote. “I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood.’”

I guest Brett forgot what the damn liberals did to he and his family.

“Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty,” Thomas added. “If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important when political issues are in the background.”

Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch joined the Thomas dissent, meaning there were three votes in favor of taking the case. Since four votes are needed for the Supreme Court to take up a case, the opinion indicates that Chief Justice John Roberts and Kavanaugh joined with the four liberals to deny review.

Justice Clarence Thomas participates in taking a new family photo with his fellow justices at the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Monday’s cases arose when Republican state leaders in Louisiana and Kansas stripped Planned Parenthood of state Medicaid funds after a pro-life advocacy group presented evidence that the abortion-provider was harvesting and selling fetal materials. Planned Parenthood contests the accuracy of these claims.

Planned Parenthood and several unnamed female patients challenged the states’ move in federal court. The legal question in Monday’s cases was whether Medicaid recipients can challenge the disqualification of a provider under the Medicaid law. As such, it did not touch on abortion directly.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Planned Parenthood on that question in June 2017, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court. That ruling is left in place now that the justices have refused to take the case.

“We are disappointed the Supreme Court declined to hear this case,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List. “The pro-life citizens of states like Kansas and Louisiana, through their elected representatives, have clearly expressed their will: they do not want Medicaid tax dollars used to prop up abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood.”

The Trump administration is currently formulating a new federal regulation called the Protect Life Rule which would forbid public funding of Planned Parenthood under Title X.